Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Keep design and siege mechanics


Recommended Posts

The current setup for siege is leaving a lot lacking, you have 15 minutes to rush a keep before defenders have an opportunity to completely nullify the attack, while dealing with walls and miniboss guards. Then if you do have enough attackers to guard the banes, the ward system is pretty unforgiving for upper wards within small keep and castle. 

My suggestion is to have wards play differently, if you have all your wards up your tree can't be damaged but each one eliminated allows the tree to take a certain amount of damage. So 4/4 100% damage reduction, 3/4 75%, 2/4 50%, and 1/4 25%.

Also each ward that is taken down increases the siege timer window by 15 minutes.

I would love to see a redesign of the small keep and castle to allow for more routes to top ward that all classes/races could access, but I'm not sure ACE has that type of time to devote to it. So, making the final ward be still useful but not completely necessary for a successful siege would make the siege flow better. Right now all defenders do is stack into top ward and just have to last for 60 minutes, which isn't compelling pvp gameplay and a huge turn off for those looking for big siege fights. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The current setup for siege is leaving a lot lacking, you have 15 minutes to rush a keep before defenders have an opportunity to completely nullify the attack, while dealing with walls and miniboss gu

Small keep is a guaranteed win for the defenders if they show up to defend. IMO, there should be no guaranteed wins in a PvP game.

Yes, the siege mechanics has to be changed. Or the small keep and the castle design needs to be changed. Or both. Current situation is that if defenders hold the choke which leads to the top ward

The map encourages funnel combat. Funnelbat? I cant criticize the funnelbat because all games play like that in funnels. I can criticize the map design forcing people into the funnels. Funnels are not skillful, rewarding or fun. They are mindless ability spam that makes people feel like there is no counter play and usually quit. It appears from the map design that the defenders advantage is holding funnels when it should be in defensive buffs and/or guards. There are guards right now but they are meaningless and slight hurdles at best. They need to open up the ward areas, allow multiple ways in so the ward fights are real fights. THE FIGHT SHOULD NOT BE TO GET IN THE ROOM. The defenders are out numbered but should have actually useful guards, maybe a boss guard, and some defensive buffs allowing them to compete and make it close. The fight should be in the room. If the fight is 50 people + 20 guards + 1 chad boss guard + a few defensive buffs or debuffs on attackers vs 125 it should be close. If defenders get -15% incoming damage and the attackers get a reduction in power efficiency or outgoing damage or something that should go a long way to evening out these fights. At a minimum more interesting to play than the current state. Tie the buffs/debuffs to the wards, I lose a ward I lose a little bit of my advantage. This also opens up some keep customization. If I want my wards guarded by a templar boss who hits the whole area with a buffed divine light and decreases all allies incoming damage in the radius I should beable to do that. The whole idea is to make the fights function as close to normal as possible despite the unevenness of numbers. 

 

Edit: I'm told there is a buff/debuff system but it applies too both attackers and defenders and are way to large. Why on earth would my keep debuffs hit me as well? Why are they so large that they need to hit both teams for it to even be close? 

 

TLDR: Funnelbat bad

Edited by Balathan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the siege mechanics has to be changed. Or the small keep and the castle design needs to be changed. Or both.

Current situation is that if defenders hold the choke which leads to the top ward, then there is literary nothing can be done to pass through that choke. Yesterday's castle siege is not the only example. There were lots of similar instances with small keeps before.

Tyrant: you were too tough, they gave up. (10/15/2020)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean yesterday, if the first ward that was taken by surprise was the top one (hardest one to take when defended) instead of one of the easy ground level wards, the outcome of the siege could have been totally different.

That castle is easy to defend the choke at the top, but let's not ignore when poorly thought-out tactical choices impact the outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DocTrine said:

I mean yesterday, if the first ward that was taken by surprise was the top one (hardest one to take when defended) instead of one of the easy ground level wards, the outcome of the siege could have been totally different.

That castle is easy to defend the choke at the top, but let's not ignore when poorly thought-out tactical choices impact the outcome.

I agree,  certainly some of small chokes should be looked at but there is no such thing as a "guaranteed win" choke or not.  Neither the Caste or Small Keep had just one choke point on the ward room, there are multiple window entrances but they would require more coordination and specific races/classes to leverage them.   

A group like BAP being prepared to hit at siege live would have changed the choke meta entirely or even just the removal of friendly fire through an Alliance could have let the attackers push more bodies to break the choke but with sieging being 85% no shows, people don't have much experience trying different strategies and I think the castle has only been sieges twice or three times ever. 

 

Edited by rutaq
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, when the defenders just have to afk at a choke point that's really REALLY boring gameplay. Only time I've played Crowfall and didn't have fun, that includes getting swarmed by deathballs, because that's a part of it. But just afk at choke and exploit AOE cap? Very boring, very poor design.

If we don't want to/can't move the wards or make the siege actually have dynamic choices that matter, then yeah, once 2-3 wards are down, just have some dmg resist on the tree and let attack kill it. How it is right now is dumb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as we're complaining about keep/castle design issues can we please get a fix on the holes in the exterior walls and the debuff heads not working in castles? If our attackers had only half their HP on parcel, as they should have from the shrine, and had actually been forced to take wall segments down without being able to sneak a giant force in between other cracks behind the defenders that fight would have never made it up into that top ward choke to begin with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MacDeath said:

Small keep is a guaranteed win for the defenders if they show up to defend. IMO, there should be no guaranteed wins in a PvP game.

Agreed. This is why I like the idea of building from the ground up and the entire keep/fort/outpost/castle is destructible.

If the alliance leader (or GL) wins the rush to the building plot, the alliance architect can start laying out plans that other guild members can start building, while others run supplies. This alone brings opportunity for PvP. At any rate, the point being we will not see cookie cutter designs for bases etc. meaning our reconnaissance assets (stealth players) are going to become far more important than just for harassing harvesters. Give them the ability to circumvent walls (I know one method is in game already) and create a lay out to share the with his alliance so they can formulate a plan.

However, once built and during siege times the entire castle can be destroyed by siege equipment. Either you head to the field to start tearing down siege equipment, or you try to build faster than they can destroy, figure it out. Once the Fort/outpost/castle is breached (possibly in several spots) the assault can commence. This allows the potential for the assault to follow many lanes and not be canalized into one area. Making defense harder.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Misfile said:

Yeah, when the defenders just have to afk at a choke point that's really REALLY boring gameplay.

You honestly believe that you could win a siege by afking at a choke point?

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Ajokoira said:

However, once built and during siege times the entire castle can be destroyed by siege equipment. Either you head to the field to start tearing down siege equipment, or you try to build faster than they can destroy, figure it out. Once the Fort/outpost/castle is breached (possibly in several spots) the assault can commence. 

This was the plan at one point. Ace has mentioned returning to free-building in dregs at some point, so that will help. If they include full destruction also, well that will nullify the issue in this thread. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mystafyi said:

I do believe that someone 'could' do just that with certain builds, if that was ones goal.

You mean like one person who is getting carried by everyone else on the defense? Or literally a defense that consists of people holding LMB?

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Misfile said:

Yeah, when the defenders just have to afk at a choke point that's really REALLY boring gameplay. Only time I've played Crowfall and didn't have fun, that includes getting swarmed by deathballs, because that's a part of it. But just afk at choke and exploit AOE cap? Very boring, very poor design.

If we don't want to/can't move the wards or make the siege actually have dynamic choices that matter, then yeah, once 2-3 wards are down, just have some dmg resist on the tree and let attack kill it. How it is right now is dumb.

 

We didn't AFK. We had to be alert for 45 minutes standing there. We had people being pulled out of position pretty frequently. Additionally, the enemy finally started sending people up the back way into the windows so we had to have a group defending that as well.

Meanwhile, the enemy seemed smart enough to distract us outside the keep initially, while another group went inside to get a ward, but they took one of the easiest wards to get instead of the hardest one that we ended up retreating to. So some of this comes down to tactical decisions by our enemy that could have been better.

But sure, I know blaming everything on something you have zero control over like the layout of the keep parcel is a much nicer news story.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DocTrine said:

We didn't AFK. We had to be alert for 45 minutes standing there.

This cracks me up just thinking about how tense you must have been hovering over the keyboard just in case.... Sort of like new tesla drivers when they first go hands free. 

just trolling btw after reading that. 😈

Edited by mystafyi
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 2 ways everyone can get up to the small keep top ward. It's not easy, you have to jump on some boxes, but it can be done. Forces defenders to have to cover 2 approaches which is good. 

The castle requires you to play a double jump class to take an alternate route to that top ward. Just need a couple boxes or something to jump on for the castle so there's an alternate path that everyone can use. 

I've yet to see a "you shall not pass" meme from that castle siege. Disappointing.   

Blazzen <Lords of Death>

YouTube - Twitch - Website

Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree, there's reworks that would make sieges more fun, with respect to both the keep/castle designs as well as mechanics. Due to the compressed nature (i.e. you gotta push in 1 hour or you lose), less war of attrition - more a war of bodies.

If there weren't chokes, I believe our Saturday castle siege would've been over pretty quick (WHoAV had considerably less bro's compared to the Wednesday no show).

In addition - had the first attacking force gone straight to the top ward, was it CC/Valeria? I want to say the outcome could've been different.

 

Opinions suck, but here's mine anyway;

  • Handshake sieges - within a certain timespan - allow sieges to be accepted, and the live time to be defined.
  • Additional siege win condition rewards - do not permit withdrawal of a minimum amount of gold/resources from buildings - when a building is destroyed allow players to loot/sack it.
  • Allow us to design castles/keeps (unlikely to happen at this stage/concept of the game, but it'd be great).
  • Fix the wall holes (please).
  • Allow city owners to place the location of guards for more strategic defence.
  • Tone down how effective guards are. Bring back city camping as a tactic...locking down your enemy city outside of a siege window was great fun in SB.
  • Implement easy transportation outside of live sieges between cities in a nation. Again, using a Shadowbane example - you could teleport between trees in your nation. Allow us methods to creating fighting hotspots in a short space of time - not travelling for 20mins for a quick scrim and a reset.

Dunno why this became a long post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what kind of alternate dimension I have entered where staring at a door for 45 minutes to get 2-3 45 second fights is "tense" engaging gameplay. Wasn't there but I watched the uncut video, wow was it boring. People on all sides, regardless of the outcome of the siege, would have had way more fun if they had a few fights in a more open space where the attackers weren't afraid to just run in and instantly wipe in a funnel. Funnel fights end to fast to be fun or interesting and more importantly remove the minimal skill involved in the combat of Crowfall. I also watched attacker streams, it is completely demoralizing watching your whole raid wipe by being forced into a funnel, there is no skill in it. Just hold W and press your charges and leaps then hope for the best. The game should not be trying to encourage this kind of combat it will kill this game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...